Linux vs Free Software Foundation

6 thoughts on “Linux vs Free Software Foundation”

• The FSF position makes perfect sense. If someone can change it, it means they can change it in ways you don't want, and since YOU can't change it, those changes stick and you're forced to dispose of the hardware.

  That may not be a big problem in wealthy areas of the world, but in the developing world it's a disaster.

• Well I am glad that you made a video addressing the FSF. While I don't agree with everything that the FSF does and tries to do, I do agree with the fundamental principal of free software. I really don't care if its licensed under an FSF approved license or whatnot, as long as it is free software. Still though I think that people should be aware of the problems that technology has created, and strive to help out with issues that can make technology more secure and privacy respecting rather than not speaking out about what companies/governments are doing with software.

• Linus makes a solid points

• Super interesting. I've never looked into this subject as it really didn't mean anything to me. This however has peaked my interest. Cheers for the great video!

• This looks like a philosophical discussion. Linus and open source is utilitarianism while Stallman and the FSF is Kantian ethics (or maybe it's the other way around). Both have their merit / relevant points of views. But they also seem incompatible with each other. However: They still collaborate and help each other on some level. Linus and Stallman might avoid each other like the plague but less extreme FSF members, open source programmers and kernel developers might not have the same issue with one another.

• This is great video! GJ TRG.

Comments are closed.